"Slutwalks" in N. America

[evildrneil]

First, can you fix your quotes in #269? It makes it appear that I have said something that you actually said, something that I find quite objectionable to be honest.

 

Don't be ridiculous - it's perfectly clear what's being said.

 

A. In a healthy civilised society, one in which there is no evidence that the way you dress increases your risk of becoming a victim of violence, the response is precisely as written by Cyclone. It's about apportioning blame. I'm not some idiot footballer who thinks that it is possible to give 110%, the maximum blame for a violent assault is always 100%, and in the case of the rape of a woman the man is always 100% to blame. As soon as society starts to apportion blame, as you have, then not only do we give the criminal a possible defense, but we also give him a possible excuse for rationilising it in the first case.

 

A. We don't live in a healthy or civilised society.

 

B. It's not about apportioning blame it's about mitigating risk. The only way that it can be used to apportion blame is if there isn't a separation of the concepts of vulnerability and culpability and the type of conflation of these two concepts by the likes of yourself and slutwalk really doesn't help.

 

C. As for evidence - you accept that the way you dress will alter the way people perceive and react to you. You further accept (I assume) that the "she was dressed as a slut - she was asking for it" pseudo-defence" is used in rape cases. From this we can build the working assumption that slutty clothing and the impression it gave was an element of what drew the perpetrator to his victim. If this were not the case then clothing would not be a part of the pseudo-defence - unless of course you think it was an after the event rationalisation which seems extremely unlikely. Now of course this isn't evidence that manner of clothing plays a direct role in drawing a rapist to his victim but is a reasonable working theory that it may be a risk factor. Now given the potential dire outcome isn't it more reasonable to offer advice based on a working theory than no advice at all?

 

As for the breast feeding analogy ...

 

Ahhh the rolly-eyes. Final resort of the person who has no actual response.

 

Oh and I notice that you haven't commented on your incorrect claim that the advice given avoid pickpockets wasn't gender specific. As this was your differentiator as to why that advice on avoiding pick pockets was valid and advice on avoiding rape was not valid are you now going to start a campaign to have that advice removed or accept that it is perfectly valid to give women advice about how it may be possible to avoid rape?

[Cyclone]

C - your logic is flawed. The defence comes from legal councel, not from the attacker and is probably a standard tactic that they would use if the situation makes it possible. We also have no evidence about how often it is used, probably not that many since 9/10 rapes are by someone the victim knew and not a stranger who liked the look of their cleavage.

After the event rationalisation is exactly what it is, and not by the person who committed the offence, but by the legal team defending them.

 

Telling someone to stop dressing like a slut is not giving helpful advice on how to avoid sexual assault, it's tantamount to a verbal assault itself.

[evildrneil]

C - your logic is flawed. The defence comes from legal councel, not from the attacker and is probably a standard tactic that they would use if the situation makes it possible. We also have no evidence about how often it is used, probably not that many since 9/10 rapes are by someone the victim knew and not a stranger who liked the look of their cleavage.

After the event rationalisation is exactly what it is, and not by the person who committed the offence, but by the legal team defending them.

 

And you have evidence of that - you've never heard it from the mouth of an offender? Or been out and heard drunken lotharios with their common "look at that she's gagging for it" line? I think perhaps you need to re-acquaint yourself with reality.

 

And yes the majority of rapes are by a partner / ex partner or someone the victim knows well but as I have pointed out before that's not what I'm talking about here and not the situation where clothing can make a difference. At no point have I said that changing your style of dress will prevent rape or that it would be something to consider to reduce your vulnerability in all cases. What I have been specifically talking about is the sort of "casual" or "date" rape that occurs on a booze fueled night out when inhibitions are vastly reduced and signals are badly misread. This is not as common as rape by someone that is well known to the victim but I would think considerably more common than pre-meditated attack by a pathological sexual predator.

 

Telling someone to stop dressing like a slut is not giving helpful advice on how to avoid sexual assault, it's tantamount to a verbal assault itself.

 

Advising someone that dressing like a slut may increase their chances of attracting a "casual" or "date" rapist is probably very good advice and nothing like verbal assault. Calling someone a slut may be considered verbal assault but that's not what is happening here.

[Cyclone]

You're asking me for evidence to support my opinion that the legal defence of "she was asking for it" comes from the legal team of accused rapists? Where's the evidence to support your assertion that it comes from the accused?

We're both making supposition, who's is more logical? That the legal defence presented in court comes from an accused rapist, or that it comes from the legal defence team of the accused rapist?

 

You think that a date rate could be avoided by wearing unpleasant clothes... Maybe if they don't style their hair, try to be boring conversationalists and wear badly applied makeup that would put off their rapist as well. Afterall you wouldn't expect someone going on a date to want to look attractive...

Taking your logic to the extreme, we should really advise women to stay at home, that would vastly reduce their chance of a date or stranger rape... It would be missing the point of course, but then so is worrying about how they dress and calling them sluts.

 

You still seem quite happy with this characterisation as well. Do you have any female relatives you can talk to? Give them a call and ask them if they ever dress like a slut, I can't guarantee that you'll get a pleasant response, but it might enlighten you a bit.

[MC Spyda]

I've just phoned my sister and asked her if she ever dresses like a slut. She said no.

[evildrneil]

You're asking me for evidence to support my opinion that the legal defence of "she was asking for it" comes from the legal team of accused rapists? Where's the evidence to support your assertion that it comes from the accused?

 

I have not claimed that my argument is evidence but it is a reasonably argues point of view where you have simply waded in and said "you are wrong" with neither argument or proof.

 

We're both making supposition, who's is more logical? That the legal defence presented in court comes from an accused rapist, or that it comes from the legal defence team of the accused rapist?

 

So I'm saying that what is (unfortunately) a deeply engrained opinion in a large proportion of the population (see many, many surveys) will be a reflection of how some people will act and you are saying that it will have no bearing on how some people will act but will only be brought out by a legal defence team? Let's see who is being more logical - I would say me by a very wide margin.

 

You think that a date rate could be avoided by wearing unpleasant clothes... Maybe if they don't style their hair, try to be boring conversationalists and wear badly applied makeup that would put off their rapist as well. Afterall you wouldn't expect someone going on a date to want to look attractive...

Taking your logic to the extreme, we should really advise women to stay at home, that would vastly reduce their chance of a date or stranger rape... It would be missing the point of course, but then so is worrying about how they dress and calling them sluts.

 

That's a pair of very feeble straw men you have set up. Firstly I have said nothing about not dressing nicely on a date; what I have said (paraphrasing here) is that dressing in a slutty manner may be taken as an open invitation to sex by some individuals. Slutty and nice are not synonymous as you seem to be trying to say here. Secondly taking nearly any advice to reduce your vulnerability to it's logical extreme would be to stay at home as it vastly reduces your vulnerability.

 

You still seem quite happy with this characterisation as well. Do you have any female relatives you can talk to? Give them a call and ask them if they ever dress like a slut, I can't guarantee that you'll get a pleasant response, but it might enlighten you a bit.

 

Do you actually still live in the victorian age? Have you really never had any female friends go out on the pull and tell you they will be wearing their best slutty or tarty or whoreish gear? Hell I've even quite frequently been asked whether an outfit is slutty enough! Yes some women will be offended by the term slutty many more won't and many will happily use it and related terms themselves. I'm quite happy using the term with some people and not with others but that's the joy of language - it's flexibility. I'm also quite happy not being so misogynistic as to think that everyone with a pair of X chromosomes is of a piece and thinks identically.

[Cyclone]

I have not claimed that my argument is evidence but it is a reasonably argues point of view where you have simply waded in and said "you are wrong" with neither argument or proof.

It looked to me like you'd just offered your opinion, and I'd done the same. I did actually offer argument, a logical explanation that the defence in a legal trial will primarily come from the legal team... That seems reasonable to me, but as you hold a different opinion you've chosen to not even acknowledge that I tried to justify it.

Speaking of which what was the argument you offered to support the defence coming from the defendant, I didn't see any, it was just a statement. Do you think that the defendant just makes it up as they go along without the lawyers suggesting what might be a good or not so good line to go down?

 

 

So I'm saying that what is (unfortunately) a deeply engrained opinion in a large proportion of the population (see many, many surveys) will be a reflection of how some people will act and you are saying that it will have no bearing on how some people will act but will only be brought out by a legal defence team? Let's see who is being more logical - I would say me by a very wide margin.

The entire defence will be orchestrated by the defence team, but that's not important.

 

"From this we can build the working assumption that slutty clothing and the impression it gave was an element of what drew the perpetrator to his victim"

 

You think that the fact that this is used as a defence in court, whether introduced by the defendant or the legal team, actually makes it true that the defendant attacked that person because she was showing a bit of flesh? Are you just pretending to be gullible now? If they're guilty of the crime then everything they say in defence can be assumed to be a lie designed to get them off, after-all they're lying by claiming not to be guilty.

 

 

 

That's a pair of very feeble straw men you have set up. Firstly I have said nothing about not dressing nicely on a date; what I have said (paraphrasing here) is that dressing in a slutty manner may be taken as an open invitation to sex by some individuals. Slutty and nice are not synonymous as you seem to be trying to say here. Secondly taking nearly any advice to reduce your vulnerability to it's logical extreme would be to stay at home as it vastly reduces your vulnerability.

You specifically mentioned date rape, and not dressing in a slutty way. Since you won't define what slutty is and it's a pejorative term I'm going to assume that you actually mean dressing up to go out. So you were in fact suggesting not dressing up to go on a date in order to avoid date rape.

And yes, any advice to avoid being vulnerable can be extended to 'stay at home', that was kinda my point and since you agree obviously not a strawman.

 

 

 

Do you actually still live in the victorian age? Have you really never had any female friends go out on the pull and tell you they will be wearing their best slutty or tarty or whoreish gear?

No, I've never heard any girl refer to themselves that way. Maybe we just have different types of friends, maybe your female friends think their "taking the phrase back".

Hell I've even quite frequently been asked whether an outfit is slutty enough! Yes some women will be offended by the term slutty many more won't and many will happily use it and related terms themselves. I'm quite happy using the term with some people and not with others but that's the joy of language - it's flexibility. I'm also quite happy not being so misogynistic as to think that everyone with a pair of X chromosomes is of a piece and thinks identically.

Ah, so I'm stereotyping when I suggest that women will be offended by being called slutty. It clearly offended a lot of women when that police officer did it though. Maybe it's something you shouldn't say in a professional capacity or to people you don't know, would you agree with that?

[hugh jarse]

if clothes cause all the problems women should wear the Muslim batman gear like in Egypt and Syria except that doesn't stop it... the men attack women there also because its the man's thinking that's wrong

[evildrneil]

It looked to me like you'd just offered your opinion, and I'd done the same. I did actually offer argument, a logical explanation that the defence in a legal trial will primarily come from the legal team... That seems reasonable to me, but as you hold a different opinion you've chosen to not even acknowledge that I tried to justify it.

 

You didn't try to justify it - you merely said I was wrong with no argument or proof...

 

Speaking of which what was the argument you offered to support the defence coming from the defendant, I didn't see any, it was just a statement. Do you think that the defendant just makes it up as they go along without the lawyers suggesting what might be a good or not so good line to go down?

The entire defence will be orchestrated by the defence team, but that's not important.

 

OK lets take it slowly - the "she was asking for it" opinion is one that is deeply ingrained in both men and women in the UK. I have said that this will be reflected in behaviour of the individuals who hold that opinion. i.e. if someone who believes that a woman wearing slutty clothing is an open invite to have sex with and who is indiscriminately looking for someone to have sex with then they are more likely to go for a woman in slutty clothing than one in non-slutty clothing. Clear now?

 

"From this we can build the working assumption that slutty clothing and the impression it gave was an element of what drew the perpetrator to his victim"

 

And yes that follows from the above...

 

You think that the fact that this is used as a defence in court, whether introduced by the defendant or the legal team, actually makes it true that the defendant attacked that person because she was showing a bit of flesh? Are you just pretending to be gullible now? If they're guilty of the crime then everything they say in defence can be assumed to be a lie designed to get them off, after-all they're lying by claiming not to be guilty.

 

That's not what I have said - I have said that the "she was asking for it" pseudo-defence is a reflection of an ingrained public opinion rather than a post event excuse used by the legal council. You seem to think that this unfortunately ingrained and widely held opinion is only reflected by the legal council rather than by the rapist and his previous behaviour. That position seems so unreasonable as to be perverse.

 

You specifically mentioned date rape, and not dressing in a slutty way. Since you won't define what slutty is and it's a pejorative term I'm going to assume that you actually mean dressing up to go out. So you were in fact suggesting not dressing up to go on a date in order to avoid date rape.

 

I was suggesting no such thing - you have (as you stated) simply made things up, attributed them to me and then argued against them. Way to build a rational and reasoned argument!

 

And yes, any advice to avoid being vulnerable can be extended to 'stay at home', that was kinda my point and since you agree obviously not a strawman.

 

You misrepresented my position as one from which that eventuality logically and easily followed and used that to attack it - so yes a strawman

 

No, I've never heard any girl refer to themselves that way. Maybe we just have different types of friends, maybe your female friends think their "taking the phrase back".

 

Or I just have a range of female friends. It is certainly the case that slutty (and tarty et al) are frequently and commonly used in a non-pejorative term as with many words that are sometimes insults/pejoratives and sometimes not.

 

Ah, so I'm stereotyping when I suggest that women will be offended by being called slutty.

 

Yes - I'm glad you noticed.

 

It clearly offended a lot of women when that police officer did it though. Maybe it's something you shouldn't say in a professional capacity or to people you don't know, would you agree with that?

 

Well it shouldn't do as he didn't call anyone slutty did he? What he is reported as saying is "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised" which is an entirely different statement from the one you are claiming. As to whether it should be used in a professional capacity it rather depends on the situation and who you are talking too. Sometimes the use of terms like slutty can really get a point across when other terms would be ignored.

 

if clothes cause all the problems women should wear the Muslim batman gear like in Egypt and Syria except that doesn't stop it... the men attack women there also because its the man's thinking that's wrong

 

It's lucky then that no-one has claimed that clothing causes all the problems then isn't it?

[Cyclone]

You didn't try to justify it - you merely said I was wrong with no argument or proof...

I did, and you chose to ignore it.

 

 

OK lets take it slowly - the "she was asking for it" opinion is one that is deeply ingrained in both men and women in the UK. I have said that this will be reflected in behaviour of the individuals who hold that opinion. i.e. if someone who believes that a woman wearing slutty clothing is an open invite to have sex with and who is indiscriminately looking for someone to have sex with then they are more likely to go for a woman in slutty clothing than one in non-slutty clothing. Clear now?

 

"From this we can build the working assumption that slutty clothing and the impression it gave was an element of what drew the perpetrator to his victim"

 

And yes that follows from the above...

No it doesn't. It follows that someone looking for sex would try people who appeared (in their mind) to be available. It doesn't follow that they would then attack them, nor does it follow that people who are in that environment hoping to score are more or less likely to be an attacker than anyone else.

 

 

 

That's not what I have said - I have said that the "she was asking for it" pseudo-defence is a reflection of an ingrained public opinion rather than a post event excuse used by the legal council.

I think it's both, the legal defence stems from the ingrained opinion.

You seem to think that this unfortunately ingrained and widely held opinion is only reflected by the legal council rather than by the rapist and his previous behaviour. That position seems so unreasonable as to be perverse.

Did you find some evidence to suggest that dressing like that does increase risk? Because I'm not arguing that there the opinion doesn't exist, I'm arguing that it the opinion doesn't cause someone to sexually assault women, they have much more serious problems than this misguided opinion

 

 

 

I was suggesting no such thing - you have (as you stated) simply made things up, attributed them to me and then argued against them. Way to build a rational and reasoned argument!

In that case you're going to have to explain why you mentioned date rape and dressing in a slutty way, because you're denying that you meant what seemed to be the obvious meaning. Maybe you're just being obtuse.

 

 

You misrepresented my position as one from which that eventuality logically and easily followed and used that to attack it - so yes a strawman

So make your position clear to avoid misunderstandings.

 

 

Or I just have a range of female friends. It is certainly the case that slutty (and tarty et al) are frequently and commonly used in a non-pejorative term as with many words that are sometimes insults/pejoratives and sometimes not.

Well I can't argue with that, you must know some really special girls if they're happy with you calling them slutty.

 

 

Yes - I'm glad you noticed.

Sorry, should I have added <sarcasm> </sarcasm> there so you didn't miss it.

 

 

 

Well it shouldn't do as he didn't call anyone slutty did he?

Your hair splitting is on top form at the moment, if you tell someone not to dress like a slut you're making a clear implication that they have or would have dressed like a slut otherwise, and that they are thus slutty

What he is reported as saying is "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised" which is an entirely different statement from the one you are claiming. As to whether it should be used in a professional capacity it rather depends on the situation and who you are talking too. Sometimes the use of terms like slutty can really get a point across when other terms would be ignored.

And the situation he was in and the people he was talking to... College students wasn't it, who were offended. So by definition he got it wrong didn't he.